A motion to stay the enforcement of an administrative act may be filed with an administrative court only if an administrative proceeding has already been instituted and the case is pending at the court. This is explicitly prescribed by the Administrative Proceedings Act, Article 12 (Article 11 before revision of the Act). The Supreme Administrative Court Precedent T. T. 26 (Supreme Administrative Court, 1958) is consistent with the substance of this statute and does not impose any restraint on the right of the people to sue, and is therefore not in conflict with the Constitution.

　　　 The Administrative Proceedings Act provides in Article 12 (Article 11 before revision of the Act): “Unless otherwise prescribed by law, the enforcement of an administrative act or decision may not be stayed by reason of the institution of an administrative proceeding, provided, however, that the administrative court or the government agency making such act or decision may, ex officio or upon application of the plaintiff, cause the enforcement to be stayed.” Under this provision, a motion to stay the enforcement of an administrative act may be filed with an administrative court only if an administrative proceeding has already been instituted and the case is pending at the court. If, however, before the institution of an administrative proceeding, it is necessary to stay the enforcement of the administrative act on the grounds that the enforcement of such administrative act will result in irremediable damage and the situation is urgent, a petition for stay of enforcement may be filed under the proviso to Article 23 of the Administrative Appeals Act with the government agency making such administrative act or taking cognizance of the appeal. If the agency refuses to stay the enforcement or fails to decide within the statutory period whether or not to stay the enforcement, the petitioner may of course raise an objection thereto in the principal case together with his dispute over such act or decision and may additionally claim damages under law, without the necessity of first filing with the administrative court a motion for stay of enforcement. The Supreme Administrative Court Precedent T. T. 26 (Supreme Administrative Court, 1958) holds: “A motion to stay the enforcement of an administrative act may be filed with this Yuan only if an administrative proceeding has already been instituted and the case is pending adjudication. No administrative proceeding may be instituted with respect to a matter without having gone through the procedure of administrative re-appeal, to say the least a motion to be filed with this Yuan for stay of the original administrative act.” The decision is consistent with the essence of our view above and does not impose any restraint on the right of the people to sue, and is therefore not in conflict with the Constitution. En passant, whether or not the person to whom the administrative act is addressed or an interested person should be allowed to file with the administrative court, before instituting administrative proceedings, a motion to temporarily maintain the status quo of the legal relations in dispute, for the purpose of bringing the public and personal interests in harmony if the addressee or such interested person is able to explain that the administrative act, once enforced, will cause irremediable and material damage, is a matter to be resolved by way of legislation when initiating improvements to the system of administrative litigation.